eHarmony Doesn't Believe You're Really Divorced

eHarmony won’t let Morgan’s mom join until she proves that she’s really divorced. She tried to join last year, but was rejected because she was only separated for seven years, and not divorced. Now that her divorce is final, she wants to register without spending another hour filling out eHarmony’s “scientifically proven” matching questionnaire.

Morgan writes:

Hello Consumerist. My mother, separated for around 7 years, applied to join eHarmony last year. She took the hour-and-some long questionnaire only to find she was rejected because she hadn’t gotten the divorce yet. Well the divorce was finalized last year, and my mom was interested in joining eHarmony again. She sent them the following message:

To EHarmony

I was rejected when I was separated. Now I’m divorced. How can I change my status without retaking the questionnaire?

Thank you for contacting eHarmony Customer Care.

We’re so happy to hear that you are thinking of using our service. It’s a pleasure to assist you in changing your marital status. Since you are divorced, please reply with the county and state of your divorce proceedings, the name of the judge, and the date your divorce was finalized. We hope you understand that this information is very important in order to protect the integrity of our matching process. Once this information is received, we will be very happy to reset your Relationship Questionnaire for you. You will need to retake the questionnaire so that we can accurately assess your relationship needs and provide matches who are deeply compatible with you.

We look forward to helping you find the love of your life.

Sincerely,

Yan V.
Customer Care
eHarmony

To EHarmony

Wow. Nevermind.

“Wow” is right! I guess those Chemistry.com commercials weren’t exaggerating!

Morgan

Anyone want to date Morgan’s mom?

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. MaelstromRider says:

    I really don’t see the problem here. If I were joining an online matchmaking service with the purpose of finding a spouse (as opposed to just hooking up) I would want to join one that verified the marital status of its members, at the very least. I’d also want the company to do criminal background checks, credit checks, and civil courthouse checks. I’d even pay extra for a service that performed genetic screening to weed out any potentially lethal recessives.

    It is also not unreasonable for them to ask her to fill out a new questionnaire after a year. Things change.

  2. MaelstromRider says:

    Cool, not only did I get the first post, but it was also the first blame the comsumer post. Woo!

  3. sicknick says:

    Why bother?

    Seriously, eHarmony gets creepier and creepier. They are so conservative, so religious, and so intrusive when all yer trying to do is find somebody to go get coffee with.

    Oh, wait, no you’re not. Users of this site honestly are hoping for instant, no work relationship creation. That’s the most disturbing thing of all.

    Here’s a tip, passionate people meet passionate people. Go join whatever sort of club, interest group or roundtable discussion suits your tastes and meet somebody the old fashioned way.

  4. Nick1693 says:

    eHarmony rejects people for no reason.

  5. differcult says:

    I actully think what they are doing is good. They are protecting their product. Give them the information they want or don’t join….pretty simple.

  6. Parting says:

    @sicknick: Clubs are good when you enjoy same activities.

    While relationship are based on characters and individualities.

    So clubs could be a start, but a person who enjoys same activities doesn’t make you a spouse ;) On the other hand, maybe his brother/sister/friend will.

  7. eben56 says:

    My son tried them once. Matched him to a girl in Minnesota. They couldn’t tell the difference between Maine (ME) and Minnesota (MN).

  8. BlogFather says:

    Yeah I’d have to agree that if your trying to find a soul mate while your still married, there’s a big problem there. I don’t see why they should just take your word for it now. You should just provide the information, and get on with it. It’s not like you’ll be too busy with all your dates.

  9. MARTHA__JONES says:

    @sicknick: I make a point of not using business who find it completely acceptable to discriminate. eharmony refuses to provide services to homosexuals and that’s blatant discrimination in my book.

    I’m married and wouldn’t use them anyway, but I tell all my single friends to use a different site.

  10. macinjosh says:

    My eH questionnaire has been stuck at about 75% complete for over a year. :)

  11. Coelacanth says:

    Does e-Harmony perform background checks on all of its members? While I suppose it’s comforting to know that for people who’re interested in possibly forming long-term relationships that may lead to marriage, wouldn’t that be up to the couple to work out their “trust issues” (which include “are you really just separated or actually divorced?”) before entering a committed relationship?

    I’ve known several people’ve who’ve separated, but never bothered to finalise a divorce until they’re ready to get remarried.

  12. snoop-blog says:

    @COELACANTH: Exactly. My brother stayed separated until he was ready to remarry. The funny thing about it was the girl he was marrying, was doing the exact same thing.

  13. wring says:

    @MaelstromRider: ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME??? eharmony has no right at all to ask for all that information.

  14. PinkBox says:

    I’ve done the questionaire just for fun a few times, and they’ve never found a match for me. Ever.

    It kind of made me wonder about the quality of the guys they have stocked up, if none were good enough for me. ;)

  15. ninabi says:

    A friend starting dating again at age 50 using another online dating service. Background checks would be nice- one possible match she was able to google when she learned his last name.

    Uh oh. Multiple DUIs and arrests for domestic violence. Oopsie. Guess he left that off his profile.

    I think it’s invasive for eharmony to ask all the details. Are they asking for all sorts of neb-nosed proof from every single person who clicks “divorced” when applying? I doubt it.

  16. MikeB says:

    @wring: Actually, they do. They can basically ask anything they want. She has the right not to answer the question.

  17. @wring: They are offering a service. If you don’t like the terms and conditions of purchasing that service, don’t purchase it.

  18. HOP says:

    there’s gotta be a better way to meet people…..it’s sad when someone has to resort to these things…..

  19. curmudgeon5 says:

    People seem to use “they don’t have the right to” interchangeably with “they’re out of line.” As others have pointed out, they do have the (legal) right to ask. But the whole point of being a good consumer should be making thoughtful decisions about where we spend our money, and I think many people would prefer not to do business with a company that has invasive business practices. It’s not a question of whether eHarmony has the right to do this (they do); it’s a question of whether they’re douchebags (they are).

  20. Aphex242 says:

    @wring: Uh, yeah, they have a right to ask whatever the hell they want. You, as a consumer, have the right to tell them to get bent.

  21. Aphex242 says:

    @curmudgeon5: Bah you got in before my post. I do completely agree with the douchebaggery comment. No question, it’s lame. But the terminology used to argue it by wring was a swing and a miss.

  22. chiieddy says:

    @Nick1693: No, they have reasons. You probably don’t agree with them, but they have them.

    They want people that don’t have severe social issues and they weed those out. They also will not accept anyone who’s gay.

    If you don’t like it, use another service.

  23. joellevand says:

    @curmudgeon5: Exactly what I was going to say, but way better worded. Cheers!

  24. vividblurry says:

    I don’t understand the problem. She took the survey a year ago. I’d imagine a lot has changed in her life since then. Of course she’d have to retake the survey! If you’re serious about meeting someone, then what’s the big deal with taking ONE hour to answer some questions?

  25. Dharma says:

    Can I point Morgan’s mom to OkCupid.com please! Since they happen to be poly friendly, being not quite divorced (or still being married) is not a problem. They are also gay friendly which is fabulous. And they have even more fun tests than eHarmony. Oh, and they also don’t tell totally cool people like myself that they are unable to find anyone who matches you. Which is just depressing.

  26. synergy says:

    What if his mother had initially said she was single? If she had, would they ever tried to find out if it was true? The way I see the site is it already works on the honor system, so why go to such lengths to prove a divorce has happened when they probably never check on all the people who claim they’re single.

  27. camille_javal says:

    @chiieddy: They want people that don’t have severe social issues and they weed those out. They also will not accept anyone who’s gay.

    That is a truly interesting choice of phrasing.

    eHarmony is so damned creepy and artificial; when you meet people in real life, you have to run the risk that they’re not being honest with you. The internet isn’t the “freaks-only” place that it used to be, so you’re meeting pretty much the same people.

    I think Morgan’s mom provided pretty much the right answer.

    were I not engaged to some freak I met on the internet, I’d much prefer this site to eHarmony: No Longer Lonely

  28. Meltingemail says:

    @MARTHA_JONES : from the other side of the coin (gay and therefore unable to marry), a big Thanks for steering your friends in another direction.

    I’m with everyone who doesn’t see the big deal here. eHarmony has strict guidelines, that’s why they make such a big deal out of themselves.

    Not sure how match.com does these things, but then again, I found my partner the old-fashioned way (by making friends “IRL”).

  29. camille_javal says:

    @Dharma: which would happen to be where I met the freak from the internet whom I will be marrying, too!

  30. fhic says:

    I’ve recently started dating again after being out of the dating pool since before the internet existed (I’m 51.) I have to tell you, the quality and quantity of dating sites is just bewildering. I can easily see someone choosing eHarmony; their commercials are good, and they seem to be sincere. But filling out their questionnaire kind of creeped me out, and my profile sits there, incomplete.

    On the other hand, you have sites like match.com and Craigslist that seem to me to be little more than lists of “let’s hook up” which isn’t something I’m interested in. Yahoo and a lot of other sites have matching algorithms that are just awful.

    This whole issue is a fascinating intersection of social and technical issues, and doesn’t appear to have been very well solved.

  31. Sasha_Pie says:

    @MARTHA__JONES: I fully support gay marriage and gay rights in general… but I don’t consider it discrimination if a company chooses to limit its service to heterosexual match-making. I wouldn’t ever log on to a hindu or motorcycle-enthusiast dating site and demand that they find me a man when I know that that’s not what they do.

    eHarmony has a right to protect its integrity by ensuring that their clients are on the up-and-up with regard to marital status. I’d be pissed if I dated a “divorced” man through them that was only really separated. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I don’t consider a marriage to be over until the ink is dry on the divorce settlement.

  32. iMike says:

    Pics of the mom?

  33. OKCupid rocks. It never matched me all that well, but I’m a tough cookie, and I’m married now, but I still keep an account for the quizzes and friend matches and stuff. I loved those guys ever since they started the Spark way back when.

    Also, everything Curmudgeon5 said.

    They totally wouldn’t ask someone filling out their initial survey to provide proof of divorce.

  34. @SpiderJerusalem: You’re bad people. But amusing.

  35. Oops. that was supposed to be directed at iMike. >.<

  36. LJKelley says:

    But, the sad part is that anyone can lie and pretend when they are taking the survery on eHarmony. And yes some people will waste the hour and you should probably be more scared of someone who lies for an hour than someone who takes 2 minutes to setup a match.com profile.

    As a gay person I set up a profile pretending I was a woman just to spite them. I only did half the questrionare though…

    But life isn’t about a secret detective or eHarmony doing a background check on your date but rather you trust your intuition. And learning to trust other people because it won’t be pretty when your ‘trust’ in eHarmony or detectives goes sour. Your trusting someone, so why not your spouse.

  37. timmus says:

    I have no problem with this. I think for serious relationships, eHarmony has the niche (as much as I hate their commercials and lavish PR). If we’re just talking about getting coffee or fun dates, there’s okcupid and one other site (can’t remember the name) that don’t do all this bullshit. I think this is all fine.

  38. timmus says:

    Yeah, match.com is the other one.

  39. deimos3211 says:

    People using dating sites should really be looking out for themselves vis a vis criminal backgrounds and previous marriages.

    It only costs $50 do a full public records check on someone (without thier consent or knowledge), which I would probably be spending anyway rather than trusting a dating website’s due diligence anyway.

  40. RichardMamercus says:

    Comment on eHarmony Doesn’t Believe You’re Really Divorced Yep, it’s a long questionnaire, but five years ago I found my wife via
    eHarmony and it seems to work for us.

    The reason why there are so many questions is to filter out lies: it’s
    pretty hard to lie consistently for such a long time.

  41. Lambasted says:

    Is this complaint suppose to elicit sympathy because I am not feeling the pain here. The world isn’t going to end because eHarmony won’t let you in. Find another dating site that is more to your liking and move on.

    Moreover, I really don’t think this is complaint worthy. Although I don’t agree with many of eHarmony’s exclusionary practices, I side with them on this one. I don’t think it’s too much for a dating site to require that its members are single and otherwise unattached. Or that after a year since the first application, a member resubmit another one.

  42. QuartilaNoppit says:

    Comment on eHarmony Doesn’t Believe You’re Really Divorced I¹m surprised this woman ran into trouble, since eHarmony sends my e-mail
    every few days asking me if I¹d like to meet the ³love of my life², despite
    the fact I¹ve been married for 2 years. No amount of attempting to
    unsubscribe from their e-mails has worked. eHarmony really doesn¹t care
    about policing their affiliates, of which many seem to be resorting to spam.
    I sure know if I were looking for love, I¹d want to meet someone else who
    was dull enough to respond to a spammed advertisement!

  43. spanky says:

    eHarmony was originally created as a matchmaking service for very socially conservative evangelical Christians. It was heavily promoted, and owes much of its success to its close relationship with Focus on the Family. While they’ve recently shifted their focus and are marketing it to a wider range of people, its roots are pretty deep, and they do apparently reject people for lots of reasons that they don’t always articulate to potential clients, but that anecdotally seem to slant their clientele toward social conservatives.

    Personally, what creeps me out the most about them is the fact that the couples in their ads almost all look eerily alike. Not only are they pretty consistently the same broad racial category, but they usually have almost always have similar features, the same skin tone, body type, etc.

    So I figure I wouldn’t need eHarmony even if I were on the market for something like that. I have two brothers, and I know how to get in contact with them already.

  44. dragonfire81 says:

    I’m not too familiar with eharmony, but couldn’t you just say you were single on the questionnaire (which is technically true if the divorce has gone through) and bypass any future problems?

  45. unohoo says:

    I get spam email from eh–so how sincere can they really be? Also, their commercials creep me out.

  46. zingbot says:

    I guess I don’t see what is wrong with dating the old-fashioned way: Throwing on a few gold chains, popping out your collar and heading to the local watering hole.

    This eHarmony crap sounds like too much work.

    Fracking elitists.

  47. Geekybiker says:

    What wrong with a service that wants to focus on marriage minded individuals? If you just want casual, why waste someone’s time who doesnt want a casual relationship? Similarly they have other qualifications of people who generally wouldn’t make good marriage material at that point in their lives. I’m glad someone is taking the time to filter out all the people who wouldn’t be available for one reason or another.

    I guess the important question to ask here is e-harmony any more successful at matching compatible people than other inclusive sites.

  48. morganlh85 says:

    That was exactly my point here (OP). Anyone can sign up and lie about whatever they want. But here they have a potential customer (taking the questionnaire is free) who is actually trying to be honest and they want her to jump through extra hoops to do so.

    Asking her to take the questionnaire again, not a problem. But new members aren’t required to send in documentation, so why should she have to do that just to continue using the account she already signed up for?

  49. MaelstromRider says:

    @wring:

    A matchmaking service is a private company that no one is forced to do business with. You can use them or not, your choice. They can ask whatever they want.

    Why does it bother you? Are you a convicted felon who’s pretending to be single but is actually still married and has multiple genetic flaws?

  50. Trai_Dep says:

    I tried eHarmony but since they’re anti-Christian – they don’t allow me twelve wives no matter HOW many times I quote them the Bible verse – I now use Craigslist instead.

  51. benh57 says:

    Of course, that divorce information is public record. If i learned the mom’s name and around where she lived, i could probably get it in a few minutes at the courthouse.

    Providing it is no big deal..

  52. sickofthis says:

    @spanky: Yeah, those ads creep me out too. It appears they are matchmaking based on race, at least partly. I will be shocked the first time I see an interracial couple on one of their commercials.

    Anyone remember SNL’s spoof of this called “Me-Harmony?”
    [www.nbc.com]

  53. Trai_Dep says:

    And BOY don’t get me started on their Lord-hating (hating!) ways. No child brides. No forced marriage to my dead brother’s wife. No beating my wives with a cudgel if she doesn’t treat me as The Master of My Domain.
    No stoning shrimp-eaters?! What’s the world coming to?

  54. dangermike says:

    I tried eharmony once. I got the 3 month subscription. In those three months, they sent me about a total of maybe 15-20 matches. Of them, I found about three to be attractive based on their pictures and texts. Their double-blind matching system requires a back-and-forth multiple choice questionnaire before entering open communication. Of 5 matches that began the questionnairre process, 2 made it past round 1 and only one made it through all three starges, after which we’re allowed to enter ‘open communication.’ But that was as far as it ever went. I never received a reply to the open communication.

    Here’s the thing, using other sites, I actually *have* met some pretty decent women. I have paid for and used yahoo and match in the past, and out of curiosity, I registered (though never subscribed to) chemistry.com. Yahoo seems to be the most honest, or at least I never felt like I was being scammed there. The majority of messages sent out receive either no response or rejection, but I’d say at least 15-20% lead to actual conversations and of those probably 70-80% lead to actual dates and least 50% of those have led to second (and more) dates. On match.com, 30 attempts at communication resulted in two replies. One was a dead end of IM conversations with a girl that was stuck on a previous boyfriend and the other led to a dead-end of a first date with a girl that seemed really stuck on herself. I was a member of chemistry.com for all of 10 minutes. If the matches they sent me were any indication, maybe they should change their policy of not rejecting anyone. There’s no way I would pay for access to their user base.

    Anyway, my point is that it’s no big loss to be rejected by eharmony. That site’s a joke. In fact any site that asks you to pay to subscribe has it in their interest to keep you from meeting anyone. There are some freesites out there (I hear a lot of bad stuff about craigslist but plentyoffish seems like it might be legit) but ultimately, if you’re going to use online dating, you’re going to have to be ready to deal with a majority of respondants who are a waste of time. I recommend meeting soon rather than spending a lot of time exchanging emails or IM’s or phone calls because people are different in person. Good luck.

  55. cronick says:

    Save your time and money. You have better odds of finding your soul-mate commenting on stupid blog articles at Consumerist and Lifehacker…

    er, any single, 20-something female billionaires who look like Paris Hilton interested in long walks on the beach?

  56. cronick says:

    Save your time and money. You have better odds of finding your soul-mate commenting of stupid blogs at Consumerist or Lifehacker…

    er, any single, 20-something female billionaires who look like Paris Hilton interested in long walks on the beach?

  57. jjeeff says:

    I too blame the “victim.” Eharmony sets the rules. Why would they save the survey questions of an ineligible person just in case the person become eligible at some point in the future?

  58. AstroPig7 says:

    @SpiderJerusalem: Here’s another happy OkCupid user. It’s difficult to meet people offline when you don’t drink (so no bars) and don’t have much time for clubs.

  59. ChuckECheese says:

    @zingbot:

    dating the old-fashioned way: Throwing on a few gold chains, popping out your collar and heading to the local watering hole.

    Truly dating the old fashioned way, as in 1983–Mr. T starter set, pink Izod, helmet hair. I can see the brass and smell the Stetson.

  60. ChuckECheese says:

    @Trai_Dep: You’re so old testament. There’s a new one you know.

  61. TPS Reporter says:

    If you don’t like EHarmony, stop whining and go somewhere else. And to say that they have no right to ask for the info and to refill out the survey, it’s their company. Start your own if you want to and run it like you want.

  62. RandomHookup says:

    @cronick: Consumerist is the perfect place to find money conscious, articulate and intelligent people (who can usually spell and write complete sentences), especially those with a bias toward blaming the victim.

    Any chance that Drgirlfriend is now Drexgirlfriend?

  63. ViewableOnTheSite says:

    One vote for FastCupid.com. I met Mr. Verified on it, and it’s by far the best money I ever spent.

  64. samson says:

    eharmony has QUALITY CONTROL for people

  65. William Mize says:

    Just for fun, I’d like to point out the irony in a recent eHarmony commercial: You see the happy couple stating how they accept each other as they are, yadda yadda, yet the have the woman STANDING ON A BOX so that she seems taller than she actually is.

    I thought it was funny.
    Maybe it’s just me.

  66. modenastradale says:

    Ugh. I find the whole eHarmony model repellent. And I’m not talking about the fact that the company is bigoted, discriminatory, intrusive, hypocritical, etc. I’m talking about the basic premise of using a computer algorithm to take the “guess work” out of searching for a compatible partner. I mean, seriously, are people that lazy? It’s not hard to find someone you’re compatible with — just know what you’re looking for, and then don’t bother dating people who don’t meet most of your criteria. Sheesh.

  67. samson says:

    People are usually not the best judge of what can make them happy. An algorithm is nothing more than optimizing choices and separting noise (or whatever). Dating sites are better than bars/church (in theory) for this and an algotithm if it worked would be a great tool. Life is a gamble anyway. Cell phones are good but talking face to face is better, and so on.

  68. Trai_Dep says:

    @ChuckECheese: Harumph. That’s like New Coke.
    I like my gods angry, spiteful, vengeful and capricious. Okaying a harem of wives doesn’t hurt either. Err, wives for Jesus!

  69. WRXChick says:

    @blandspace – Not really. A friend of mine married a moonbat he met on eHarmony, and we’re counting down the days until he wises up and divorces her. She either lied on the questionnaire or they were looking for psycho golddiggers. Since they married, she’s only cost him about $50K+ for all of her various “business” ventures. Maybe if she bleeds him dry, she’ll move on to another victim.

  70. marsneedsrabbits says:

    eHarmony not only doesn’t allow gays to use their service, they apparently think that gays are so alien to the human race that their 4 billion-point compatibility survey won’t work for gay folks.
    See: [www.bizreport.com]

  71. JN2 says:

    They could solve most of their critics if they asked for an honest marital status FIRST. They make you fill out the hour long survey (yes, it is that long) and THEN the marital status is asked last. Then, if you are even separated, BZZZZZZZZT!! My Aunt tried eHarmony and met a few fellas but the e-mail/vetting process does get tedious after awhile and creeps still get through.

    Match.com is where I met my last soulmate.

  72. M3wThr33 says:

    eHarmony hates pre-marital sex, gays and athiests. Don’t support them.

  73. ptbartel says:

    The whole concept of eHarmony itself is just ridiculous. “Don’t try and think for yourself, we know better than you do what you want in a mate. We’ll go find that person for your, at our own pace of course.” As far as the marital status thing, I’d like to know if they ask to confirm the status of every single applicant. It seems rather curious that, in this instance, they want proof of her divorce, but I’m guessing that they don’t make a habit of this.

  74. kdollarsign says:

    my boss met her husband speed-dating and he is the most obnoxious person I know. I think she just wanted kids. anyway, I’m in E-Harmony’s camp. If the consumer in question were male, everyone would be cheering e-harmony for not promoting skeeziness.

  75. The Dude says:

    Every other match-making institution (online, bars, colleges) at some point drops their standards and gets sleezy. Finally, one company is sticking to their principles. And they are THEIR principles. You don’t own the company. You have plenty of other options to meet your future ex-spouse.

  76. humphrmi says:

    As @spanky said, eHarmony is extremely conservative, and they want to appeal to the conservative crowd. It’s not illegal, it’s not unfair, and it’s not even wrong, it’s just what they do. I, personally, do not subscribe to their philosophy, but I will argue to the end for their right to do it. As many others said, if you don’t like, it, there are plenty of other matching / dating sites out there.

  77. deb35802 says:

    Good for them! If I could afford to use them I would.

    I stopped going to dating websites cause of all the men there who claimed to be single but once I got to chatting with them either I would figure out or they would admit they were married and just looking for some side action.

    Its unreal the married men that have IM’d me when I’ve been online. Its gotten to the point where one of the first questions I ask them is “Are you married?” Most of the at least have the decency to tell me the truth and then I tell them goodbye!

  78. deb35802 says:

    @marsneedsrabbits:
    Homosexuality is immoral. Good for EHarmony that they stand up to that perversion!

  79. BigBoat says:

    Sum of thread: EHarmony takes themselves too seriously.

    @deb35802: How sad for you. :(

  80. TechnoDestructo says:

    When Okcupid matched me with a 500 pound suicidal basketcase, I blanked my profile.

  81. Pink Puppet says:

    @deb35802: How sad, to think you’re so judgmental. I honestly feel sorry for you.

  82. Ecoaster says:

    It’s amazing how much misinformation is in these replies. For example: 1. There’s nothing in their questions that has to do with politics or political beliefs. 2. You can adjust your settings to be matched with any ethnicity you want. Anyway, you get the idea. As for the original story– I know plenty of women who’ve been matched with married guys on other sites. I’m sure those women would find this approach to be a good thing.

  83. clarkbarr says:

    eHarmony is a third rate con job. I filled out their so-called “questionnaire” and they sent me a quite nasty e-mail telling me that I scored in their “lower quadrant” and I should look elsewhere. The reply made me feel like a jerk. Screw them.

  84. ptbartel says:

    @deb35802: it must really be awful to go around life feeling that sort of hatred towards people of any sort. Like the others, I feel sorry for you.

    @ecocoaster: I may have missed a specific comment you were referring to, and if so I apologize, but I don’t think that anyone was accusing eHarmony of discriminating against non-conservatives; most everything I’ve seen said that eHarmony was an extremely conservative company – and by my understanding Dr. Warren is a reliable republican donor. But I could be wrong.

    @humphrmi: Absolutely right, we may not like it, but it’s not illegal. My problem is that they don’t enforce this across all members, they just seem to have targeted this woman. If they did it for every applicant, then at least you know what you’re getting into. They just seemed to have capriciously applied this standard to this woman; that’s what I have a problem with.

  85. shikaningen says:

    This guy clearly isn’t your typical hypocritical, money-grubbing, GOP-apologist, Undead-Jewish-Zombie-fellating freak. Even though he stands to lose a lot of money by only allowing members who conform to his strict, strictly idiotic, deontological moral code, he’s going ahead with this policy.

    I’m not sure which I hate more… the casual hypocritical Christian who cares enough to interfere with the progression of science but not so much as to interfere with his profits or the militant, non-hypocritical one that makes only the most assiduous efforts to conform to the brainless, useless principles of his faith.

    They both should die in a fire… but which deserves it more?

  86. veronykah says:

    @NameGoesHere: That happened to me too! Kind of made me wonder, when after all of that, you get NOTHING.
    I figured everyone on there must be squares. After checking out other online dating sites, I’ve come to the conclusion the kind of men I’m interested in DON’T use online dating sites.

  87. MightyCow says:

    The problem is actually signing up for E-Harmony.

    That’s got to be one of the worst dating websites out there.

  88. thalia says:

    What’s this woman’s problem? If I were thinking of joining an online dating sight in search of my future spouse or the beginning of a serious relationship, I’d certainly want to know that the site made absolutely sure that all the information people were providing was factual. And you know of course that if they didn’t make you verify all that stuff and some predator made an account and raped or killed someone, everyone would blame the site for not taking their customers’ safety more seriously by verifying everyone’s status and identity.

    Seriously, there’s just no pleasing some people.

  89. nXt says:

    @MaelstromRider: You fail.

  90. samson says:

    Why when people put the word ” fail ” into the comment section I always find that extremely funny. I feel like either Beavis or Butthead. He said fail har har har snort

  91. Melsky says:

    I think they should say upfront that they don’t accept separated people so that someone won’t take an hour filling out a questionnaire only to be told at the end that they are unacceptable.

    But really, they are probably doing her a favor by not letting her use their expensive and crappy site when there are free ones out there that are better.

  92. humphrmi says:

    @Melsky: You might get the idea from their website; go to eharmony.com without logging in and you see two tabs: “Single” and “Married”. Go to the “Single” tab and you can get started with their matching service. Go to the “Married” tab and it offers you an online marriage counseling service.

    Without an explicit statement, I can get the gist of what they’re saying – “If you’re single, we’ll help you find a mate. If you’re married, we’ll help you stay that way.”

  93. @aphex242: You said that so much better than I did!

  94. Landru says:

    I think their advertising should include the fact that they are enforcing these “morals”. More people would find them creepy.

    “We will protect you from the gay and the married.” (Though not from the folks who lie and say otherwise.)

  95. @deb35802: Wow – I feel sorry for you, too. Being so judgmental and all.

  96. hanoverfiste says:

    I’d like to see a hook-up site that would provide independent verification of peoples HIV status…

    I’ve read 1 out of 3 women have sex on their first date on these sites and 50% of them unprotected..

  97. veronykah says:

    @hanoverfiste: I’d like to see if its 1 out of 3 women having sex via these websites on the first date…how many men that use them have sex on the first date? Or, even better, how many men use these sites to be able to meet and have sex with large numbers of women?

  98. ecwis says:

    @scarletvirtue (ΣΣΣ): Having morals is judgmental? Alrighty then.

  99. ecwis says:

    Wait…
    eHarmony isn’t even making her send in a divorce decree? What’s the problem here?

    Something tells me that Morgan only had problem with providing this information because she isn’t really divorced. If she is actually divorced, I don’t see a reason to withhold that information from them since divorce decrees are public record.

  100. marsneedsrabbits says:

    @deb35802:
    You wrote: Homosexuality is immoral. Good for EHarmony that they stand up to that perversion!

    How sad it must be to be you.

  101. consumedchick says:

    @HOP: It isn’t “sad” a tall. I know so many ppl that have met and dated ppl from sites like these. It is super mainstream now! get a clue!:P

  102. theblackdog says:

    I’m like the guy in the chemistry.com commercial

    “Nope, still gay.”

    I used Match.com (they own Chemistry.com BTW) and ended up finding my boyfriend of 6 months now :-)

  103. Trai_Dep says:

    @deb35802: So is judging. Unless you’ve got a beard, a gown and encourage fathers to hack the hearts of their own sons out as tribute. Troll.

  104. jjason82 says:

    It would be irresponsible of eharmony to NOT react the way they did. Bravo for them. As creepy as their service is, at least they seem to be making absolutely sure that they won’t be matching anybody with a married individual. I would be extremely mad if I met somebody through their service and it turned out they were still married.

  105. RookOmega says:

    Be careful of Eharmony – I signed up, was on for one month, didn’t like the service, cancelled,

    and one week later I’m getting a “free” subscription to a magazine I did not ask for…

    RL friends are your best bet to find that special “someone”

  106. ThunderRoad says:

    eHarmony accepted me once, which is scary enough. But once I got in and paid my $$$, they matched me with 3 people 90+ miles away, two of which were no longer single and the third was in the midsts of being on trial (and eventually losing) for insurance fraud.

    I went to match.com and found a couple sane people that were at least local.

  107. Rectilinear Propagation says:

    To EHarmony

    Wow. Nevermind.

    Best. Consumer. Letter. EVER.

  108. Bye says:

    @deb35802: Careful, lil’ Debbie. God loves a good joke and He might make you fall in love with some big ol’ Republican closet case toilet troll.

    Don’t hate so much and maybe you’ll find real love.

  109. unklegwar says:

    Good for them, keeping some integrity to the service!

  110. @differcult: “They are protecting their product.”

    PEOPLE ARE NOT PRODUCTS.

    Also, a Mr. Orwell called for you.

    I’ve never dealt with eHarmony, because they’re a) religious and b) discriminatory, plus I think I’m far more likely to meet someone I’ll love by doing things I love than by sifting through the desperate people online; BUT, if they check on divorces without doing criminal background checks, they’re either idiots, or only *trying* to look like they care, rather than actually caring, about the quality of their–*shudder*–“product”.

  111. MrBiggles says:

    @ThunderRoad: Similar situation. I tried eHarmony a bunch of years ago. They accepted me, and matched me to a couple of people. None were willing to share a photo, now I understand that it is supposed to be based on mutual values and whatever, but if a guy (I’m a girl looking for heterosexual lovin’) isn’t willing to share a photo, I ain’t meetin’ him for coffee. Maybe my values don’t match up with eHarmony’s. That photo matters, at least to a certain extent.

  112. @ecwis: It’s not about having morals, it’s about being homophobic.

    @theblackdog: You and me both … except it would have to have been a girl in the commercial. (Didn’t find my GF through match.com, though)

  113. ChuckECheese says:

    This weekend, I got to see an episode of Match Game 76 on GSN. One of the contestants, some guy, said that he met his wife via a service “that matches people using a computer.” Don’t you love that turn of phrase? Gene was quite shocked at this, and the audience murmured.

  114. ForDisplayOnly says:

    Some people talk about meeting people online as if it was a character defect, which seems a little unfair. Back when I first put the big L on my forehead,I was on eHarmony and met lots of nice people, including my current darling mate (yes, we look like attractive replicants). And though it’s slanted towards people looking for long-term relationships/marriage rather than hookups, EH women I met didn’t mind getting down with Mr. Right Now until a more promising/permanent match arrived. I’m not conservative by any means, nor were most of the people I met. Like in real life, it was dumb luck to get some matches I liked.

    I’m surprised eHarmony would bother with this dubious divorce “verification”,they do no verification whatsoever of what you initially enter (how would they know my race, marital status or anything but my standing with the credit bureaus?). How could it be worth their while? They are not in the background check business.

    I agree eHarmony has a creepy pedigree and their mysterious “worthiness” criteria is puzzling. It’s overpriced and there are some truly odd results from their algorithm. And their survey thing IS endless and tedious. Still, for me they only had to get it right that once that mattered, I love that woman.